R. v. Chan Wing Shing

CACC000618/1994

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1994, No.618

(Criminal)

___________

___________

Coram: Hon Power, Mortimer and, Liu JJA in Court

Date of hearing: 22 August, 1995

Date of judgment: 22 August, 1995

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

Liu, JA:

1. The applicant was convicted of blackmail. He was charged with making an unwarranted demand of $87,000 from Mr Lee Ah-peng with menaces at Wan Tsui Estate, Chaiwan on 24 March 1993. The applicant sought leave to appeal against both conviction and sentence. He has since abandoned his application for leave to appeal against sentence.

2. The facts which gave rise to his charge are these: when Mr Lee lost about $5,000 in a Macau casino, the applicant, together with others, offered him a loan. Mr Lee declined the offer. Pressure to bear was brought on him. After some forceful persuasion, Mr Lee agreed to take $5,000 from the applicant's group. Mr Lee was thereupon taken to outside a VIP gambling room in the casino. The applicant and the group went in and came out shortly afterwards, claiming to have lost $70,000 on Mr Lee's behalf. Mr Lee protested but to no avail. Mr Lee was intimidated. Ferry tickets were bought, and the applicant and the group left with Mr Lee for Mr Lee's home in Hong Kong. Mr Lee's parents and three elder brothers were at home, and that is where the offence in the charge was allegedly committed.

3. There were two cautioned statements given to the police which implicated the applicant. Both Mr Lee and one of his brothers testified against the applicant as the first and the second crown witness at the trial. The applicant gave no evidence. At the conclusion of the trial, the jury found the applicant guilty as charged, that is to say, that the applicant did commit the offence in the charge. Of the two grounds in support of the application for leave to appeal against conviction, neither can be supported. The application for leave to appeal against conviction is totally unmeritorious and is therefore dismissed. As the appeal was wholly unmeritorious we order that there be three months' loss of time.

Representation:

Chan Wing Shing, Applicant in person

Mr T.H. Casewell of Crown Prosecutor for respondent